tv Book Discussion on Death by Moderation CSPAN January 25, 2014 9:45pm-10:04pm EST
destruction and so the king at a number of case studies each one is an illustration or the united states has developed weapons designed to be less powerful, less deadly, less destructive than that have been designed to replace it or supplement. >>host: what are those today? >> the easiest to grasp of precision in guided munitions and it did san illustration with their much more accurate than previously. you can be more precise to be sure it is only the targets if they are aiming at and to do less collateral damage your unintended consequences. that makes the weapons
capability reusable from combat. >>host: was the neutron bomb going in that direction ? >> that is the second of the case studies that nuclear weapons in particular many that were in the arsenal has been so large or so destructive it is hard to imagine in the situation you would want to use them in combat and that they cause more collateral damage so that is to try to develop nuclear weapons such as the neutron bomb to attack certain kinds of targets without collateral damage. what people have been talking about is the nuclear
weapons used to attack targets and the number of countries of concerned they responded to a greater capability by putting their military headquarters deep underground in caves where it is hard for conventional weapons to attack them so if you could develop as all feel good weapon to dig out the command bunkers said much less damage to the surrounding communities with less long-term fallout danger so looking at the plausibility of more capability. >>host: does the u.s. have so he'll the nuclear weapons? >>guest: some. not much it is a concern if you imagine a scenario to
attack a particular target existing conventional weapons may not suffice you may need in the digital more precise that to be usable for those types of functions i describe those alternative strategies that even the relatively yellow yield are unlikely to have so much collateral damage they would not satisfy the user to be a usable military capability. >>host: is the trend towards more precise weapons at new? >> in general what military technology has done over the years is to pursue weapons
than their bigger and more destructive that is not the only saying over decades for the pursuit of greater accuracy is what they have been interested in but you want to be more precise but also have a bigger bang at your disposal, and now you want more weapons that are more usable with scenarios today is states finds itself in engaged different from world war ii where you have the traditional mass of force with the counter insurgency operation other kind of military operations. >>host: what role does
donald rumsfeld have? >> someone who sponsored the pursuit of the different weapons capabilities different generations of its anti-satellite weapons their countries of russia and china have the capability to damage each other's satellites in an era where the military uses that is faced you can indicate for reconnaissance they contemplate the possibility is of attacking as well. over the years to have developed a wide radius of mechanisms to attack each
other for the new list would be in more precise, a more discreet doing less damage for those touse cent of map that would show a targeted satellite the new technology uses energy beams and it attacks and a more precise way with the explosive debris from the fallout is perceived as a genuine problem poses a hazard so to attack a satellite without creating to every you might
be able to inflect partial limitation rather than a catastrophic failure that is with the pursuit of those anti-satellite weapons. >>host: reagan era system does that fit into your book? >> that is the illustration to use space in a different way. there is a treaty that does have some limitations on the weapon is a share in but it is relatively small and modest one of the things they are allowed to do is use the satellite to monitor each other's weapons programs to track incoming missiles and guy day the receptor and that was part of the program for the "star
wars" program. >>host: chided just landed a satellite tom the man. is this the u.s. defense community is watching closely? >> absolutely. they are note -- the number to state power eclipsing russia and the united states has a much bigger space program in terms of military by far they are a dominant player. of much more global and serious player this is the subject united states is watching closely. >>host: professor you say a change of military weaponry? why is that? >> because that is the way things have been that inventions cover along with unpredictable speed in to
incorporate these new technologies does not happen often unfortunately it turns out the biggest for her to innovation is diversity a country that loses the of war but suffers from another confrontation to innovate. if successful baby come complacent and history is littered with illustrations that failed to take advantage in suffer as a result spec the french forces for the time the commanders of europe and the british forces developing this technology enabled them to attack from standoff distances that decimate the french that led to a dramatic change in the balance of power to europe.
>>host: the drone program is that an abrupt change, a revolutionary change, a persistent change? >>guest: it is another chapter of the book and another of might be all of the technology of the remote private vehicles especially for a greater degree of autonomy that is the next revolutionary technology to give the missiles more capability than they now have four autonomous action. said at the moment there tightly controlled by remote private to release the weapon but it is plausible some of these technologies are given the capabilities to reduce their own searching and make their own decisions. >>host: what is the take away of "death by moderation"?
>>guest: there are a variety of changes under way with the military and what they have in common is the ability to use force in a more localized passion and the danger is it becomes too easy to use force where we regret we're on a slippery slope that seem to be relatively low cost relatively precise but it becomes uncontrollable. so fifties weapons i support the evolution it is in a dangerous position. >>host: what about you? to a nuclear weapons is an area we should not pursue that. any nuclear weapon would be so much more powerful that
even if it appears to have the military capability that is aligned we don't want to cross. >>host: to other countries have access? eighty-one. they do. there is a limited capability to influence that is the role to try to negotiate were countries will refrain from pursuing toward deploying weapons technology. but there are a number of nuclear weapons that are sure range weapons that we may find applications for in combat. >>host: was the obama administration approach to weapons? >> with the new start treaty to attempt to in engage
russia in another generation of nuclear arms so far it is a complicated series of variables because russia wants to talk about missile defense with the united states is resistant to that not just so long-range strategic weapons but both countries are now to the point they want to engage with nuclear arms control with china and the other nuclear powers as well. . .
easy. the politics will be hard for both sides. none of us will get 100% of what we want. but the alternative will cost us jobs and hurt our economy. there is a hardship on millions of hard-working americans. so, let's set up the party sid and work to pass a budget that replaces reckless cuts with smart savings and wise investments in the future and let's do it without the brinksmanship that stresses consumers and scares off investors and the greatest nation on earth -- the greatest nation on earth cannot keep conducting its business by drifting from one manufacturing crisis to the next. we cannot do it. [applause] off let's agree right here right now to keep the people's
government opened for the united states of america. [applause] up next on book tv, "after words" with a guest host tanzina vega come in new york times' national correspondent. this week motor dame history professor felipe fernandez-armesto and his latest book "our america a hispanic history of the united states." the graduate looks of the settlements in the evolution of the united states from the perspective of latinos of dollars and discusses the modern-day hispanic resurgence in the united states.
the program is about an hour. >> host: felipe, thank you for being with us. >> guest: thank you for having an interest in my book. >> host: absolutely. it's quite an interesting one. we can start of a talking about the population of hispanics in the united states. in 1980 there were about 15 million hispanics in the united states and by 2012 nearly 53 million by 2015 we are expecting 128 malignant. your book helps give the foundation and explain how the population are right in the country and we will talk about where it's going by the time we reach that 128 million. >> guest: that's very kind of you to say that. you think of this relatively